From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com [207.106.133.19]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EE09DDFCE for ; Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:10:34 +1100 (EST) Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:09:59 -0500 From: Nathan Lynch To: Michael Ellerman Subject: Re: [PATCH] scanlog_init cleanup, minor fixes Message-ID: <20080326230959.GI7137@localdomain> References: <20080323225144.GA7137@localdomain> <1206571210.7482.0.camel@concordia.ozlabs.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1206571210.7482.0.camel@concordia.ozlabs.ibm.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Michael Ellerman wrote: > > + /* Ideally we could allocate a buffer < 4G */ > > + data = kzalloc(RTAS_DATA_BUF_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL); > > + if (!data) > > + goto err; > > Not your bug, but what happens if data is > 4G? Kaboom? An old RPA doc (scan-log-dump isn't specified in PAPR) says the buffer should be "contiguous real storage", so... yeah, probably. That's why I preserved the comment. Will fix if I get access to a machine to test this code more thoroughly (plenty of other issues in this file, too).